I abhor, hate and detest HOA's. A guy at work was fined $100 for leaving a 2 x 4 in his driveway for a couple of hours. Another person got a $50 fine for hanging a beach towel on the fence to dry. Small minds with too much power.

I am not a lawyer, but isn't there some principle related to established practices? So if something has been done for a long time and there are no new laws enacted, then there is a high standard required in order to start enforcement?

These people have been doing these bible study gatherings for 17 years.

I'm guessing this city ordinance will be handily dismissed as violations of freedom of religion and freedom of assembly, as well as the privacy rights that have been determined to exist in the bill of rights.

It was probably passed to prohibit the potential disruption of non-profit organizations or "churches" setting up shop in residential areas. However, if it is legal to invite friends to one's home for dinner or cocktail parties or for other social events, there is no reason one cannot have a discussion among one's friends on questions pertaining to religion in general or the Bible in particular.

On the other hand, we don't know, (do we?) how large and how frequent these gatherings have been. Perhaps the "home Bible study" angle is what the media has chosen to emphasize, where the issue may actually be an excess of traffic and parked cars in a quiet neighborhood. Even so, it seems then the city ordinance to cite would have to be something to do with disturbing the peace or obstructing the roadways or creating an eyesore in the neighborhood, etc.

Isn't there an Amendment or something that talks about "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

Isn't that like a real important law or something?

OK....say I'm a follower of Mithras and live next to you. You won't mind if I and 50 other people exercise our religion and dig a big pit in my front yard to ritually sacrifice a live bull, will you?

After all it is MY religion and my right to exercise it. Sorry that it is loud and stinky. After all the bull doesn't appreciate being killed and all that fresh and dried blood is sort of smelly, not to mention the bullcrap everywhere.

What? You would prefer that I exercise my religion and sacrifice the bull elsewhere and leave your nice residential neighborhood in peace!?!

Unconstitutional!! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!

It does seem like it's more than a Bible Study group, which to me connotes at most a half-dozen people. The picture shows scads of people -- all descending weekly on a house in a neighborhood? After 10+ years, the welcome mat would be pretty thin if I were a neighbor.

After 10+ years, the welcome mat would be pretty thin if I were a neighbor.

It would have reached a boiling point within a year, if it really bothered a neighbor. Two possibilities; 1) Something accidental happened, ie something like landscaping damaged, that broke the camels back, or 2) new neighbor still within his first year and has reached a boiling point.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew) Unconstitutional!! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed

Nerd(ette)!

I see both sides here…SURE you have a right to worship, but I have a right to not have 12-20 cars on my street 1 or twice a week…A Super Bowl Party is one thing, but a weekly gathering of 50 people to watch sports, serve alcohol, and party is another…a few friends reading the Bible is OK, but a weekly gathering is another…sorry.

OK....say I'm a follower of Mithras and live next to you. You won't mind if I and 50 other people exercise our religion and dig a big pit in my front yard to ritually sacrifice a live bull, will you?

Then you would probably be charged with sacrificing a bull in the wrong zone or something, not having a church. The problem is what they charged them with was not “too many cars/noise violations”. Is there a limit on how many people are allowed to be invited to ones house at any time? Is there a limit on how often that can happen? I mean, I’d like to see them call the cops on a wake.

It does seem like it's more than a Bible Study group, which to me connotes at most a half-dozen people.

I think I saw 50 listed as the number and was wondering if they counted kids. If it’s just families, it could be as few as 12 cars. I don't remember having 50 people at a bible study, but counting kids you could easily reach 30 when I was a kid.

How annoying that is to your neighborhood probably depends on how much space there is and how close they live to the neighbors.

Because the entire subdivision is privately owned. Roads, grounds, everything. County does cover the area with police and fire, but that's about it.

Thankfully, we do have municipal water as the plant is only a few miles away. I grew up with a friend, smack-dab in the middle of south Chicago, who's entire block was unincorporated Cook County. They all had well water and there was a ridiculous lime level in it. I don't think they owned anything white and their ice tasted awful.

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew) The city, by the way, has declared that if you have more than 3 Bible readers gathered together, that is a churchIsn’t that pretty much how the Christ fellow defines a “church?”

ScottM I see you are a John Galt, exploiting the Masses and walling yourself off from them! One day, tvarishe…the axe WILL fall!

"Stephanie Fromm hosts a Bible study on Wednesdays that draws about 20 people, while Chuck Fromm's Sunday-morning gathering draws as many as 50"

So it isn't just once a week that the neighborhood is inundated with people. Wednesdays AND Sunday.

"City officials in San Juan Capistrano, Calif. say Chuck and Stephanie Fromm are in violation of municipal code 9-3.301, which prohibits “religious, fraternal or non-profit” organizations in residential neighborhoods without a permit."

If he's holding church services on Sunday morning, he needs to do it somewhere else

The reason for this type of Zoning isn't to keep people from their religion. It is to keep people from establishing churches and other types of organizations in residential areas. Organizations that can grow and get out of hand.

They may be holding services for 50 people today, but what about in the future when they become more "popular" and the attendance grows to 100....200....300 people.

As much as I'd like to be outraged, I have to say that if they do draw close to 50 people weekly (or twice a week), that isn't like any Bible study I am familiar with. Perhaps they need to rent a room somewhere. A community center. A church. Meet in a bank basement.

And most Christian traditions would say not to be confrontational to your neighbors, but be respectful.

Dust Bunny Queen, I knew about this case before Ann posted it. The neighbors said there have been NO parking issues. Apparently the area is fairly rural with big yards and these folks have adequate parking. And remember, this has been going on for 17 years.

Dust Bunny Queen, legitimate zoning and street parkign rules are one thing. I am not disputing that. But this case is not that, it is about over reach. Seriously, if he had 50 people over to watch football it would not be an issue.

The Fromms say the non-denominational meetings are well-suited to their home, located on a sizable acreage similar to surrounding homes, and they say they have been careful to maintain low noise levels both inside the house and on the patio. They say visitors who attended the meetings never had trouble finding a place to park on the property, which is large enough to accommodate a corral, barn, and pool.

"Dust Bunny Queen, legitimate zoning and street parkign rules are one thing. I am not disputing that. But this case is not that, it is about over reach. Seriously, if he had 50 people over to watch football it would not be an issue.

You need to look at the facts."

If you were my neighbor and had 50 people over regularly I would have an issue with it - and I love football. If for no other reason than it's a royal pain to have, what, 10 to 20 or 25 cars parked on a street over and over.

TMW, if people are parking on the property and not being loud, I am not impacting the quiet enjoyment of your property. They are not parking on the street, so you and Dust Bunny Queen need to stop jumping to conclusions. This case is distinguishable from what you are imagining.

You really should have lead with "We live in an privately-owned subdivision, so the HOA is a necessity", as that's really the relevant point.

Given the many scare stories, of ancient origin, about HOA abuses, it would be interesting to have you weigh in on how you ended up in such a location. In my case, we (completely naive about such issues) bought a home in an older subdivision with nary an HOA in sight, but I could easily see our younger selves having stumbled into an HOA situation w/o really knowing what we were getting into.

It is idiotic for atheists to think they can fine people for reading a Bible and that's a good idea. You will positively encourage people to read the Bible. And to refuse to pay your fines. And then you have to jail people for reading a Bible. And then you got religious people up in arms. And more people are reading the Bible. And refusing to pay your fines. And before you know it, you atheists are up to your ass in a religious-inspired revolution. You think I'm kidding? Fine me, see what happens. You'll have to jail me, cause I ain't paying that shit.

But go ahead, DBQ, and run for small-minded bureaucrat. You've got it all figured out.

DBQ, I don't understand your zoning argument. Sure, it's the law; and the law is stupid.

Suppose the local law forbids building a church in that area. Well, this isn't a church, it's a house. It's only a church if the owner says it is. Right?

We have a sheet-metal building in this town that was once a hardware store, and now it's a church. It wasn't a church until they put the sign out front and the cross on top.

So this house appears, from the outside, to be a house, as it always has. A couple of times a week, the owners have about 25 cars parked in a lot on their (quite large) property, and the nearest neighbor's house is probably 100 yards from this parking lot.

What's the problem? How does this hurt these neighbors? What business is it of theirs what's going on inside that house?

Whether they're passing a collection plate and doing their taxes properly is an entirely different issue; between these people and the IRS. Again, no business of the neighbors.

The ordinance came to them, they did not come to the ordinance. And they are challenging it. That is what individuals do when there is a misguided stupid law that conflicts with fundamental rights.

I hate nanny officials interfering with my life and the lives of fellow citizens. If this group spilled out of the yard into the streets and impacted the neighbors, then I would support what the city is doing. But that is not the case. I also think the motivating driving the City Attorney is religion not zoning. I support them fighting this one. Just like I support people fighting in Wisconsin over drinking milk from their own cows.

Dust Bunny Queen, so prior restraint is okay over what might happen in the future? Neighbors also have a right to bring their own action if they disagree with what a neighbor is doing. In fact the neighbors have not complained, except for one.

Sometimes that is better than expecting the "government" to carry that water for you, especially on a case like this.

Are you stating that the ordinance was enacted specifically to target these people?

Did this ordinance exist before they began using their residential property as a church? Or did the city enact the ordinance later as a punitive act against this specific group? Or did the ordinance expand to cover them in an expansion of city boundaries?

but I could easily see our younger selves having stumbled into an HOA situation w/o really knowing what we were getting into.

It was our first house, but I was 33 at the time, so not nearly as young as my folks were when they bought their first. I made it a point to read through the bylaws and didn't see anything out of the ordinary or that I wouldn't want my neighbors to abide by...such mundane things as making sure garbage cans are taken back from the street by the day after collection, etc etc. Common sense stuff and each plat is represented by someone living within that area.

It's how democracy looks and, frankly, about as large a community as it COULD work in.

Many Christians are taught to " first pray for governors and all who are in authority" over them.

The reason is that the Gospel is best able to be spread when teaching and preaching is not restrained by hostile governments.

This is not the death penalty for being a Christian or a Jew that Islamics love so much, but it is like a death penalty for the action of teaching and preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom of God in San Luis Obispo, California.

The restraint on using public places for preaching the Gospel of another Kingdom is already self righteously imposed by our all powerful philosopher kings on the SCOTUS, and now restraints on teaching and preaching on private property are going in to complete the brave new world's rules.

Are you saying if you don't have cash you can't exercise your religion? That somehow you are being prohibited?

No, I’m asking what happens when you have a twenty person group (and let’s say for the sake of argument they take in no money at all so aren’t a legal church) and can’t afford a location. If you have a giant house, with a freaking barn and plenty of parking, why can’t you have twenty people over on Sunday and talk about god? I’m saying what happens if you legitimately can’t afford a hall.

If they were having 50 people over every week to watch football or participate in an orgy, this "law" would not apply to them.

Exactly. You shouldn’t have special rule on how many people can come over based on what you’re doing. If there is plenty of room, as in this case (seriously, 6 acres? They aren’t hurting the neighbors!), why can’t you have a bible study at the house?

The zoning ordinance prohibits the establishment of churches and other types of organizations in residential areas.

How many people coming over talking about god makes it a “church”? 3 is a bad answer and I would say 20 is pretty middling.

and now restraints on teaching and preaching on private property are going in to complete the brave new world's rules.

There is no restraint against teaching or preaching.

There is a restraint against establishing a Physical Church in a residential area. There are lots of restraints on what can be done in residential zoned properties.

Just like there is a restraint from building an auto shop, a restaurant, a Wal Mart, a fish processing plant, a Masonic Lodge, a Red Cross Administrative building and lots of other restrictions in RESIDENTIAL zoned properties.

Zoning laws are to protect the property rights of everyone. Not just YOU....EVERYONE.

Interesting to contrast DBQ's high-horsedness about this case and respecting regs and all with the many statements she's previously made about circumventing those with which she doesn't agree. Hilarious, really.

How about the freedom to practice your religion in your home, to have friends over and to discuss what you please? Next will some idiot tape your conversation and rat you out for "studying"...as opposed to discussing or lecturing. Time to fire the nanny.

DBQ why the defense of zoining ordinance. What have you experienced in your life that makes you so knee jerk in favor of the city jerks?

And don't get me wrong, I have seen this go the other way. A friend of mine had a informal "wedding venue" open up next to his house. They would rent it out to people who would cater and bring their own alcohool. So when they had weddings the noise was outrageous, late into the night, and he would occasionally find drunk guests boffing in his bushes (and once on the hood of his car).

Obviously that later example warrants government intervention and a big law suit against the neighbor causing that nuisance.

But a Sunday morning group like this parking on the host's property? Please, the city attorney should have shown more discretion.

And when I said the ordinance came to them, I am not sure when the ordinance was passed, but these folks have been doing this "meeting" for 17 years. So it was not a problem for 17 years, but when one neighbor complains the city issues a fine? How about a little investigation and to see if there really was an impact.

DBQ you are not my wife, so I do not have to conceed you are right on this one!

Interesting to contrast DBQ's high-horsedness about this case and respecting regs and all with the many statements she's previously made about circumventing those with which she doesn't agree. Hilarious, really.

Not really. The rules and regulations that I disagree with are those that are intrusions into personal space and personal choices.

If I want to drink raw cow's milk or use certain food products those actions do not affect anyone but myself. If I want to keep a herd of braying donkeys or goats on my property (unless it it zoned for that already) I am adversely affecting my neighbors and I have no right to do that.

Actions that don't affect other people or impact anyone but the individual should be no business of the government. That is why I am NOT opposed to same sex marriage. It affects no one but the participants. This is why I oppose abortion. There is a huge affect on another person.....the baby.

Sure..I'm being selective. However, I am not being inconsistent.

Zoning and other types of laws are meant to keep our actions from adversely affecting the community or other people ARE appropriate. Laws such as these are meant to protect the property rights and other rights of the community as a whole.

I'm not one of those people who think we should have no government or no rules. Limited government is appropriate. Without some rules and laws it would be chaos. Those laws and rules are determined by the community at the level we are talking about in this case.

If the community deems it appropriate and harmless to have a Church in a residential area, then they as a community can change the laws by petitioning the City Council and demanding that the rule be changed or eliminated.

Since June 2010, the Fromms have opened their home on the northern outskirts of San Juan Capistrano, CA for a Sunday morning Bible study due to renovations at their normal place of meeting. Since last January, they have also hosted a Thursday evening Bible study, which like the Sunday meeting is said to draw anywhere from 6 to 40 people.

They may have been holding services for 17 years. But they were doing it elsewhere. Not in a residential area that is not zoned for such activities.

How do you define a church for those purposes? I think that is the main issue here.

Yes it is. I would say that if you hold regular organized church services in a consistent physical location on a consistent scheduled basis ..it is a church.

The other question is that if you are going to allow exceptions to the law for a church or for religious purposes, are you going to turn a blind eye to ALL other exceptions to the law?

Or do we want to selectively apply the laws or ignore the laws based on who you are, what organizations you belong to and if your organization is popular or culturally accepted.

Were they establishing a church, though? I thought they were just meeting to study the Bible.

If zoning laws rule, why does a city (about 15 miles away from this house) ignore a house in an upscale R-1 zone that has been bought, chopped up, and rented out to 20-30 illegal aliens who all claim to be of the same family? Who were selling used cars from their driveway? This went on for years.

Allow me to say what hasn't been said. I don't care what the law says - the law is an ass in thus case. And DBQ doesn't get to decide what a church is and isn't.

And furthermore, contrary to the law, you DON'T have a constitutional right to have a certain view, especially when in your line of sight SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY exists. Who do you think you are to tell someone else what he/she can have on his own property.

If it were up to me, HOA's would be rendered illegal, and zoning laws would be erased except in cases where fellow homeowners' health would be affected. And there would have to be physical proof of it.

I guess everyone has a point where they cross over into not having any issue living in a police state. I guess it depends on who's ox is being gored.

I've seen some folks asking the question here "How do you define a church?"

That certainly is part of the issue, but not for the reasons you might think. That the ordinance singles out specific groups (religious, fraternal, etc.) to whom this ordinance will apply means that it is clearly unconstitutional.

A valid time, place & manner restriction MUST be content/viewpoint-neutral. Period. This ordinance, as it has been explained in the articles, is clearly not content/viewpoint-neutral, because it does not apply equally to all groups.

The advanced arguments about neighborhood access & parking hold no water, either. A valid time, place & manner restriction must also be narrowly tailored to serve this (admittedly)significant governmental interest. Thus, the ordinance would have to prohibit, for instance,"restricting traffic flow." It does not, but instead merely restricts gathering at all.

I was waiting for our resident ConLaw Professor to weigh in, but I haven't seen anything from her yet.

A few further questions: (1) No visible mechanism where a dedicated minority could get ahold of the HOA leadership and make life miserable for everyone? (2) How easy is it to get rid of bylaws if they've outlived their usefulness (I'm thinking here of things like the frequent ban on outdoor clotheslines.)

1) Plat representatives are re-elected each year. Anyone owning (very few rentals anyway) in a given plat can run. They just need x number of signatures from residents of their plat. I suppose that's as good as it gets regarding a mechanism.

2) That's a good question. I'm not sure about how this is handled, but it's interesting enough for me to find out.

zoning laws would be erased except in cases where fellow homeowners' health would be affected. And there would have to be physical proof of it.

So you won't mind if I set up my fish processing and smoked food plant nearby?

How about my large collection of pre 1970 partially dismantled autos that I am using as parts cars for personal use and are parked in my front yard three deep.

How about the plumbing business that we have and all of the various part, defunct bladder tanks. The noise from the testing of pumps is really minimal and the welding operation isn't dangerous to your health.

If I get a legal permit, you won't mind if I open a bar and have 40 people every night. I promise that we will only park on my property and keep the noise down. Since there are no zoning laws that flashing neon sign with a neat pointing arrow saying Dust Bunny's Road House won't be a problem will it?

Since there are no zoning laws, I'm going to build a Section 8 housing development right next to your house or better yet, the elementary school and have 20 apartment units to the acre. Nothing like a large cheaply built tenement property to say welcome to the neighborhood.

If there are no zoning laws, I think I'll build a paper pulp processing plant near by. Not to worry the prevailing wind only blows your direction 40% of the time and while stinky, there aren't any health issues. If there are....prove it.

For a while, I talked to churches about religious freedom issues. Zoning was a huge issue. They change laws on established churches. Also, new communities don't zone for churches. In this case one neighbor complained. And they are just supposed to say the law is the law. But, all in all, there are a lot of limits on the free exercise.

San Juan Capistrano is my neighborhood. I went to the Catholic elementary school at the Old Mission. I grew up in Capistrano Beach, a couple of miles away. San Juan had 4,000 people then, and was isolated from other communities by bean fields and orange groves. Now it has a population of 35,000 and is part of a megalopolis stretching from Oxnard in the north to the boundary of Camp Pendleton in the south. It makes me feel old and crotchety, but I wish they would all go away, back to Michigan and Wisconsin and New Jersey whence they came, and where it is great sport to make fun of California and Californians.

However, the knee jerk reaction seems to be that it should be hunky dory to break laws JUST because it is a religious group that YOU favor.

I would say the prevailing opinion is rather that either

1. The law is being misapplied, ie, this is not an actual 'church' but rather a bible study, that should not be treated any differently than a monday night football party or

2. The law is wrong and should be changed.

I rather think it's one with a smidge of two in that if there are noise complaints or traffic is blocked or something like that then the town would have a right to restrict activities but only to the point where their actions don't impose on the neighbors.

DBQ, what do you think of the illegal churches in Communist China? The government allows people to go to officially sanctioned churches. And yet this weird Christian sect seems to want to practice religion in the privacy of their homes.

The Church bells have been rung in Sacred Hearts and St Stephens parish every day for the past 100 years. Recently a newly arrived athesit who bought a home on the block came to to tell the reverand that Carroll Gardens was not a "Catholic" neighborhood anymore and that they could not ring the bells anymore because they disturbed him.

So you won't mind if I set up my fish processing and smoked food plant nearby?

Nope. Not if it's your property in the first place.

How about my large collection of pre 1970 partially dismantled autos that I am using as parts cars for personal use and are parked in my front yard three deep.

Since rats and other vermin live in such situations, I think you could safely make the argument that that would affect my health. So yes, I would have a problem.

How about the plumbing business that we have and all of the various part, defunct bladder tanks. The noise from the testing of pumps is really minimal and the welding operation isn't dangerous to your health.

It's not dangerous to my health (that would include my hearing)?Then no, I don't have an issue.

If I get a legal permit, you won't mind if I open a bar and have 40 people every night. I promise that we will only park on my property and keep the noise down. Since there are no zoning laws that flashing neon sign with a neat pointing arrow saying Dust Bunny's Road House won't be a problem will it?

I'll grant you one farther. If it were up to me, you wouldn't NEED a permit. In a free country with free property rights, why should you have to get a permit? So no, I won't mind. A lot of people live in neighborhoods with bars. And a lot of people live above bars. They're not whining about the noise.

Since there are no zoning laws, I'm going to build a Section 8 housing development right next to your house or better yet, the elementary school and have 20 apartment units to the acre. Nothing like a large cheaply built tenement property to say welcome to the neighborhood.

If I stay true to my roots, then it's your property. I can (along with my neighbors) try to out-bid you and keep the land vacant. If not, then oh well; I guess I have to live with it.

If there are no zoning laws, I think I'll build a paper pulp processing plant near by. Not to worry the prevailing wind only blows your direction 40% of the time and while stinky, there aren't any health issues. If there are....prove it.

See the response prior.

No zoning laws. Really.

Really. Believe it or not, the country got along just fine until a bunch of busybody neighbors and power-hungry bureaucrats thought of new ways to control OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY. We used to live in a free country; not so much anymore.

Your posts are usually dead-on; apparently, this is a sore spot for you. You can't have freedom and be told what you can do with your own property. If you're willing to concede that freedom isn't as important when it comes to this, then at least you'll be consistent. I know I'm being consistent.

I think there's a useful distinction to be made between a church and a private bible study gathering, in that a bible study gathering can be invitation-only, where a church is pretty much expected to take all comers.

A church, then, can exercise control of its premises AFTER a disruption occurs, but can't really prevent one from occuring, because it does not control who shows up.

A private Bible study club is fundamentally different from that, and that doesn't have much to do with the size of the gathering, within reason.

Nevertheless, it hasn't been shown, in this case, to cause a niusance that anybody can define.

I think DBQ's IRS point is off base. Even if they consider any donations as "gifts," the recipient doesn't have a reporting requirement. That's the donor's responsibility.

There's a problem if the donor tries to write off the donation, but again, that's the donor's problem, not the recipient.

I think DBQ's rhetorical jihad against this couple is unwarranted.

WV: "inked."What if instead of Ash Wednesday, we had Tattoo Wednesday every year?

The couple's listed address is available at online White Pages resources and from that you can get a good view of the street and the neighborhood at Google Maps (and maybe at MapQuest). I can't give an informed opinion on the zoning, the HOA, whether services rather than studies are being conducted or whether there is in fact an "organization," etc., but it does appear to be an area in which there is, as they say in South Park, "ample parking day and night."

Dust Bunny Queen will not admit she is wrong! Defend he power of zoning.

There was a Have Gun, Will Travel episode on some son of a beloved sheriff who tried to impose the Philadelphia municipal code on some frontier Wyoming town. Hilarity ensued. Paladin had to come and talk sense into the pigheaded kid.

I would suggest that you all read something about the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Whether they are or are not a church is not the issue because churches essentially are generally not subject to zoning restrictions. This is one area where Congress has codified a First Amendment standard and thereby preempted municipalities.

Fred4Pres said...Dust Bunny Queen, legitimate zoning and street parkign rules are one thing. I am not disputing that. But this case is not that, it is about over reach. Seriously, if he had 50 people over to watch football it would not be an issue

=================I side with DBQ on this. The HOAs have been abused, but they exist to protect homeowners from the disruptive and detracting effects of a single property owner. That can make life less pleasant and lower property values if they do not maintain their property and follow the rules they agreed to when they bought the place and accepted the HOA contract.

If you are a Libertarian Freedom Lover or some religious zealot that dreams of your own church or a hard-working mechanic that feels they have a right to have 9 part or wholly stripped for rebuilding autos on your front yard - GO BUY A FREEDOM-LOVING NO PROPERTY RESTRICTIONS AS THE HOLY FOUNDERS BELIEVED, CHURCHES/MOSQUES WELCOME, HOME REPAIR BUSINESSES LOVED HERE!! plot of land in a different neighborhood.

BTW - While HOAs are quite defendable, I imagine DBQ would also agree that they need some latitude to ALSO protect conscientious and compliant residents from the neighborhood nosy busy-body that prowls around looking for the least transgression to report to the "authorities". I know of several people that got "you have got to be kidding me!!" notices of violation for lawns not mowed after the mower died and was two weeks in a repair shop, kids leaving bikes on the front lawn with both parents out at work, etc.

PETER V. BELLA said...Your home is no longer your castle==============With good reason. Not that Freedom to do what you pleased with any property you had was ever enshrined in the Constitution, the sacred parchment.In colonial times, it was left to the neighbors to informally work out that a whorehouse did not belong on the Village Square..nor rum tavern. In the rare cases an "entrepreneur" disagreed, mysterious origin fires happened.

Laws gradually became more codified - no fire hazard business in harbor areas, no pig raising in city limits..London's and later Chicagos Great Fires became the impetus to say block development, develop fire breaks, put owners under rigid fire codes. A man's castle would not be the reason why 10,000 other castles ended up burning.

In the 1910s, cities began trying to make them more livable places and also facilitate public health concerns. Following France, Germany after cholera outbreaks and polluting of water supplies in mixed use, helter-skelter development led to "zones" so sickness was not a consequence of putting up factory worker apartments next to a dead horse rendering plant..

Americans soon followed and SCOTUS finally confirmed in 1926 that zoning trammelled no liberty that benefits of modern development and public health did not trump.

I know we've been talking about HOA's a lot, but I'm not sure that was the issue here. Wasn't it the city/county that got involved? Don't they live on a 6 acre plot of land with ample space for parking? Aside from the fact that they live in California, I'm not sure that's the issue here. You may be able to avoid a HOA, but it's hard to move away from government. They are everywhere...

Funny, around here, churches are pretty much all in residential areas. The local government wants it that way -- they don't want a piece of commercial property becoming tax exempt. And no one flips out about a church being in -- gasp! -- a residential neighborhood. I really don't see what would be upsetting about it.

Of course, now I'm wondering whether there are places where churches are welcome neither in residential nor in commercial areas. . .

Suppose it were a book club -- i.e., a bunch of people who get together to discuss something they've all been reading. (These are everywhere, even pre-Oprah ...) Would that be OK? I mean, so long as it wasn't the Bible?

I just don't get your objection. So far as I can see, these people have been careful not to disturb their neighbors, aren't making noise or clogging the street with parked cars &c., and are generally minding their own business. It doesn't seem analogous at all to running a car-parts business off your front lawn. As someone who generally greets every comment you make with a mental "Right on!," I'm puzzled.

wv: stoidu. I think there are some people camping in Manhattan who went to Stoid U.

I should add that HOAs are the perfect environment for petty tyrants. My husband until recently taught at a school that was at the end of a long street that became (well after the school was there) a seriously upscale neighborhood. Suddenly there was all this concern about traffic, and it was closely monitored at certain hours, so that teachers had to be careful not to leave the campus between (e.g.) 5 and 6 p.m., lest limits be exceeded.

You see the same thing where people move into neighborhoods with preexisting businesses in them (airports, factories, nightclubs, whatever -- it was a particular problem when there was that craze for "lofts" in mixed-use neighborhoods) and then complain that such-and-such is loud, smelly, inconvenient, whatever, and has to be altered. Speaking as one who spent seven years living next door to a Berkeley Farms operation, with a smell like rancid yeast on the air most days, I sympathize; but it was there before I was.